Re: Stardust matter predictions
- From: jgreen@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 17 Jan 2006 17:21:29 -0800
Jonathan Silverlight wrote:
> In message <1137471020.705637.113700@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> jgreen@xxxxxxxxxxx writes
> >
> >Jonathan Silverlight wrote:
> >
> >> In message <nrPyf.7578$Zo.7437@trnddc07>, Mark F. <res049nn@xxxxxxx>
> >> writes
> >> >
> >> ><jgreen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >> >news:1137387585.579767.123650@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> >> Astronomers place great faith in their ability to analyse the chemical
> >> >> composition of distant objects by spectroscopy.
> >> >> Assuming that such has been done by observers of the source of the
> >> >> material, how will those predictions shape up? What WILL the material
> >> >> consist of, and what were the predictions?
> >> >>
> >>
> >> >My prediction is.
> >> >It must be cheese, just like the moon!
> >> >
> >>
> >> I've asked this before, but did an astronomer really compare the
> >> spectrum of cheese with that of the moon?
> >> It appears in Robert Heinlein's "Rocketship Galileo" and I've often
> >> wondered if it was something he made up or a real event.
> >
> >A very predictable silence.
>
> The only silence I've noted around here is your reply to my post about
> the Magellanic clouds (thread "Milky Way Galaxy is warped and vibrating
> like a drum")
>
> >If predictions have been made as to the chemistry from analysis of
> >spectroscopic data treated via Einstein, and it turns out to be way off
> >base, BIG problems for astronomers as to what OTHER mistaken notions
> >they may have as to the composition of cosmic entities.
> >A chance here to put analytical spectroscopy to the test.
>
> And just what has relativity to do with spectroscopy, at least for solar
> system objects?
> Spectroscopy is a fairly blunt instrument, but for instance this paper
> <http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988PhDT........13B> says "A mixture of
> carbon and silicates fits the data. The derived carbon-to-silicon
> abundance for this mixture is approx. 0.7, consistent with some other
> results, but lower than the value derived from mass spectrometry."
> It will be interesting to see if comet Wild is similar. I doubt the
> detailed analysis will wildly (sorry :-) differ from the carbon/silicate
> model. And it will be very detailed - isotope composition, microprobe
> analysis, all the resources of the world's laboratories to compare what
> we know by remote sensing and space probes. Note that we already have
> mass spectrometer data for the composition of cometary dust grains from
> the Giotto, Vega and Stardust probes, so we can compare them. I don't
> think Deep Impact had one, and sadly CONTOUR was lost.
> Deep Space 1 used an infrared spectrometer to observe comet Borelly, and
> Deep Impact used one on Tempel 1. We aren't just talking about
> spectroscopy of the coma any more.
Thanks. That is the sort of reply I was after.
My point being, to extrapolate the consensus of otherwise of these two
analysis (lab and spec), to the likelyhood of accurate analysis of the
composition of distant stars/galaxies/jets etc
Jim G
c'=c+v
(I'll have a look for that other- it has slipped my screen)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Stardust matter predictions
- From: George Dishman
- Re: Stardust matter predictions
- References:
- Stardust matter predictions
- From: jgreen
- Re: Stardust matter predictions
- From: Mark F.
- Re: Stardust matter predictions
- From: Jonathan Silverlight
- Re: Stardust matter predictions
- From: jgreen
- Re: Stardust matter predictions
- From: Jonathan Silverlight
- Stardust matter predictions
- Prev by Date: Re: Liberals powerless to stop Conservatives
- Next by Date: Re: Milky Way Galaxy is warped and vibrating like a drum (Forwarded)
- Previous by thread: Re: Stardust matter predictions
- Next by thread: Re: Stardust matter predictions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|